It figures that if fed jobs were tax exempt and the government reduced the budgets of said agencies by their current tax liability, that there would be bureaucracy savings in the hundreds of millions year on year, and the greatest act of fiscal conservatism in American history. Federal employees will be paid less as a result, but the qualitative benefit of a tax-free income would compensate employees to a greater degree than the cash alone.

It figures that if fed jobs were tax exempt and the government reduced the budgets of said agencies by their current tax liability, that there would be bureaucracy savings in the hundreds of millions year on year, and the greatest act of fiscal conservatism in American history. Federal employees will be paid less as a result, but the qualitative benefit of a tax-free income would compensate employees to a greater degree than the cash alone.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I'm against any agency that has "defined benefit" pension benefits. IMHO EVERYONE should be in SS & Medicare (including congress & the prez) with other benefits such as salary, medical coverages, 401k, and/or stock options as the sweeteners. I also believe that the Feds need to limit CEO and corporate compensation.

I disagree with your attempt at exempting anyone from taxes, especially government employees. I'd also go after off-shore tax evaders. Its time to get everyone in the boat, or prohibit them from doing business in the most lucrative markets.

If you want to save Federal money, eliminate Fannie/Freddie/the Fed/HHH/HUD, etc. Look at which agencies wasted the most money over time, then save billions, not millions.

i would couple the reduction in tax burden with a commensurate reduction in funding, like the OP said. in turn this would likely result in a reduction of salaries. this could account for the qualitative benefit of having a low, but tax-free income, either with pull for hiring staff or more likely with even lower pay - a departmental decision.

otherwise, public sector growth does constitute economic growth contrary to some popular views, and the fair tax looks stupid up against our current tax system, notwithstanding the immense size difference. I think that wagering solvency on consumption alone is catastrophically inept and passing out fiat on a non-means-tested basis isn't 'fair' or sensible either. i even question if the federal government can apply a tax on intra-state commerce as is proposed.

I just interviews and was offered a job for a government job! On the website the mission statement was to investigate fraud and eliminate waste in City of Chicago. I was very excited by these prospects. Until I found out it was just investigate the hiring, firing, promotion and demotion of city employees. Seriously, you need a $20 million department to govern this? What a waste! On top of that so many city workers were off limits! Ask all the employees why they choose this job! PENSION was right there at the top and job security (hard to get fired). I though I was going to be Serpico, instead I would have been adding to Government Waste and inefficiency!

So what I found:
(1) A government agency that seemed more legit and necessary than most was a huge waste!
(2) Government Pension Plans are an injustice.
(3) The government always wastes and is inefficient in whatever it does.

It figures that if fed jobs were tax exempt and the government reduced the budgets of said agencies by their current tax liability, that there would be bureaucracy savings in the hundreds of millions year on year, and the greatest act of fiscal conservatism in American history. Federal employees will be paid less as a result, but the qualitative benefit of a tax-free income would compensate employees to a greater degree than the cash alone.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

No. It would be better tor get rid of their pensions and have them pay SS and use 401Ks like the rest of us. And get rid of unions with the premium pay that is then funneled into union dues and cycled through the Democrat campaign machine. Also, pay should be frozen (and at higher levels reduced) until the differential with the private sector is corrected.

People who work for the government are citizens like the rest of us and should not be exempt from paying for their share of the government.

It figures that if fed jobs were tax exempt and the government reduced the budgets of said agencies by their current tax liability, that there would be bureaucracy savings in the hundreds of millions year on year, and the greatest act of fiscal conservatism in American history. Federal employees will be paid less as a result, but the qualitative benefit of a tax-free income would compensate employees to a greater degree than the cash alone.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

No. It would be better tor get rid of their pensions and have them pay SS and use 401Ks like the rest of us. And get rid of unions with the premium pay that is then funneled into union dues and cycled through the Democrat campaign machine. Also, pay should be frozen (and at higher levels reduced) until the differential with the private sector is corrected.

People who work for the government are citizens like the rest of us and should not be exempt from paying for their share of the government.

Click to expand...

Federal Employees have been paying into Social Security for 25 years, so has Congress

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!